International Journal of Pedodontic Rehabilitation

‍ ‍Home ‍ ‍Aim & Scope ‍ ‍Editorial Board ‍ ‍Archives ‍ ‍Articles ‍ ‍Author instructions ‍ ‍Online Submission‍ ‍ Contact Us‍ ‍

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

The International Journal of Pedodontic Rehabilitation is committed to maintaining integrity, transparency and accountability in scholarly publishing. The journal follows the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Authors, reviewers, editors and the publisher are expected to follow responsible research and publication practices. Allegations of research or publication misconduct will be assessed fairly and confidentially.

Editorial and Peer Review Process

Manuscripts are initially assessed for completeness, compliance with the journal’s requirements, relevance to its scope, scientific quality and ethical acceptability. Suitable scholarly manuscripts are evaluated by at least two independent reviewers through a double-anonymous peer-review process. The Editor-in-Chief or designated handling editor makes the final decision after considering the reviewers’ reports and the merits of the manuscript. Further information is available on the journal’s Peer Review Policy page

Fair Play

Editors evaluate manuscripts solely based on scientific merit and intellectual content without discrimination regarding race, gender, religion, nationality, ethnicity, institutional affiliation, or political beliefs.

Confidentiality

Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must maintain strict confidentiality regarding submitted manuscripts and related communications. Manuscripts must not be shared, discussed, or disclosed to unauthorized individuals.

Conflict of Interest

Editors, reviewers, and authors must disclose any financial, academic, institutional, or personal conflicts of interest that could influence manuscript evaluation or interpretation. Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts where conflicts of interest exist.

Duties of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to provide unbiased and constructive scientific comments, maintain confidentiality, complete reviews promptly, identify uncited relevant literature, and report plagiarism, duplication, data fabrication, image manipulation, or ethical concerns. Personal criticism of authors is considered inappropriate.

Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards

Authors must provide accurate, original, and scientifically valid data with sufficient methodological detail to allow reproducibility. Fabrication, falsification, manipulation, or misleading reporting is considered unethical.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must submit original work and appropriately acknowledge all sources. Manuscripts are screened for text similarity using Turnitin. Similarity reports are evaluated by an editor and are not judged solely by a numerical score. Unattributed copying, substantial text recycling, plagiarism, duplicate publication and misleading use of another person’s words, ideas, data or images are unacceptable.

Multiple or Redundant Publication

Any substantial overlap with the authors’ previously published or submitted work must be disclosed to the editor and appropriately cited. Secondary analyses must clearly identify and cite the primary publication. Previously published figures, tables or images may be reproduced only with acknowledgement and permission where required.

Authorship

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have significantly contributed to study conception, design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or manuscript preparation. All co-authors must approve the final manuscript before submission.

AI-Generated Content Policy

Artificial intelligence and AI-assisted tools cannot be listed as authors. Authors remain responsible for the accuracy, originality and integrity of all submitted material. Authors must disclose any use of generative AI beyond basic spelling, grammar, formatting or language correction. The disclosure must identify the tool and explain how it was used. AI use in data collection, analysis, image generation or figure preparation must be described in the Methods section. Generative AI must not be used to fabricate or manipulate data, citations, images or research findings. Reviewers and editors must not upload confidential manuscript material to publicly accessible AI systems or use AI-generated assessments as a replacement for independent judgement.

Ethics Approval and Informed Consent

Human research must have approval from an appropriate ethics committee or institutional review board. The manuscript must state the name of the approving body and the approval number. Research must comply with the Declaration of Helsinki, as revised in 2024, and applicable national and institutional requirements. Informed consent must be obtained from adult participants or from the parent or legal guardian of a child. Assent should be obtained from children when required by applicable ethical guidance. The privacy and confidentiality of all participants must be protected.

Case reports and case series must include a statement confirming that written informed consent for publication was obtained. For children, consent must be obtained from a parent or legal guardian. Consent must specifically cover the publication of identifiable photographs, radiographs, videos or clinical information.

Animal research must comply with applicable institutional and national requirements. Studies conducted in India must comply with the relevant requirements of the Committee for Control and Supervision of Experiments on Animals. The approving body and approval number must be reported in the manuscript.

Data Availability and Integrity

Authors must retain the data and records supporting their work and provide them when reasonably requested, subject to legal, ethical and confidentiality restrictions. Research articles must include a data-availability statement explaining whether the supporting data are publicly available, available on reasonable request, restricted for ethical or legal reasons, or not applicable. If data are deposited in a repository, the repository name, persistent identifier and access conditions must be provided. Fabrication, falsification, selective reporting and inappropriate manipulation of data or images are unacceptable.

Retraction and Corrections Policy

Articles may be retracted if findings are unreliable, plagiarism is identified, duplicate publication is detected, unethical research is reported, image manipulation or fabricated data is identified, or peer review manipulation is detected. Corrections, errata, expressions of concern, or retractions may be issued according to COPE guidelines.

Appeals and Complaints

Authors may submit appeals regarding editorial decisions with appropriate scientific justification. Appeals will be independently reviewed by the editorial board.

Consequences of Ethical Misconduct

When misconduct or a serious breach of journal policy is established, the journal may reject the manuscript, correct or retract a published article, notify the relevant institution, employer, ethics committee or funding organisation, correct article metadata, inform relevant databases where necessary, or restrict further submissions from the responsible author for a defined period. Any action will be proportionate to the seriousness of the matter and based on the available evidence and the outcome of relevant investigations. Further actions may be taken according to COPE recommendations and institutional ethical policies.

Research and Publication Misconduct

Research and publication misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, deceptive reporting, inappropriate image manipulation, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation and concealment of serious conflicts of interest. When a credible allegation is received, the journal will conduct an initial assessment and may request explanations, original data, images, ethics documents or other relevant records. The person concerned will be given an opportunity to respond. Matters requiring investigation beyond the journal’s authority may be referred to the relevant institution, employer, ethics committee or funding organisation.

Corrections, Expressions of Concern and Retractions

The journal will correct the scholarly record when an error or ethical concern affects a published article. A correction may be issued when an error does not invalidate the article’s principal findings. An expression of concern may be published when a serious concern remains unresolved. Retraction may be considered when findings are unreliable because of misconduct or major error, plagiarism, redundant publication, unethical research, peer-review manipulation or another serious breach. Notices will be clearly identified, linked to the affected article and made freely accessible. A retracted article will normally remain available with a clear retraction notice, except where removal is required for legal or safety reasons.

Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers and readers may submit complaints concerning the journal’s procedures, staff conduct, peer review or published content to the editorial office. Complaints should clearly identify the matter and include any supporting evidence. Authors may appeal an editorial decision when there is evidence of a factual error, procedural irregularity or substantial misunderstanding. Disagreement with the decision alone is not sufficient. The appeal must provide a reasoned response to the relevant editorial and reviewer comments. Complaints and appeals will be assessed by a person who was not directly involved in the matter whenever practicable. The decision reached following an appeal is final.

Intellectual Property

Authors retain copyright in their published articles. Articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. Further information is available on the journal’s Copyright and Licensing page. Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to reproduce third-party material where permission is required.

Post-Publication Discussion

Readers may submit a letter to the editor or contact the editorial office to raise a scholarly question or concern about a published article. Relevant comments may be sent to the authors for a response and, where appropriate, published as correspondence. Concerns involving possible error or misconduct will be assessed under the journal’s corrections, retractions and research-misconduct procedures.

Publisher’s Responsibilities

MM Publishers supports editorial independence and is responsible for maintaining the journal’s policies, website, published archive and corrections to the scholarly record. The publisher does not interfere with individual editorial decisions for commercial, institutional or personal reasons. The publisher will work with the editorial team, authors, reviewers and relevant institutions to address credible concerns about submitted or published work.